Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
't think you can trust -- >> senate majority leader harry reid says he hopes gun legislation will come out of the judiciary committee but he was noncommittal over whether he would sign an assault weapons ban. >> would you vote for it? >> frankly, she knows, i haven't read her amendment, i didn't vote for the assault weapons last time because it didn't make sense but i'll take a look at it. >> i will bring in "washington post" columnist ruth marcus and senior staff writer for "the hill" alex bolton. good monday morning to both of you. ruth, this is the president's first big sell to the american people. what do you think he needs to say here? >> well, the president said he was going to give it everything he's got. i think what he needs to say is look, don't listen to the nra, listen to logic or listen to the nra from a number of years ago when it supported universal background checks. i think that there are three issues here in order of likelihood. one is background checks which has huge support and makes complete sense. one is limits on magazine sizes which i completely think the administra
harry reid suggested it's pure politics. >> i guess to be able to run for the senate as a republican in most places of the country, you need to have a resume that says, i help filibuster one of president's nominees. maybe that helps. maybe that keeps the tea party guy from running against you. but this should not be politics. >> senator john mccain's response to politics, you played politics, too. >> in 1989 they filibustered or basically stopped him from coming to the floor of the senate. we didn't have a secretary of defense for three months. it didn't seem to bother harry reid or carl levin at the time. >> i want to bring in david nak can amura. >> hi, chris. >> what happened here? did the president misread how this was going to be? >> this has been something that he's dealt with for the past couple years. the white house thinks that republicans are purposefully trying to sort of bottle up not only these higher level appointees but lower level judges. it's not that they didn't expect it. we got an e-mail yesterday from senior white house officials saying, take a deep breath. it's
officers. >> and in fact, over on the senate side, harry reid has said the same thing, even though he has not given it overwhelming support to these ideas. he said they deserve an up and down vote. is that going to happen? and do you give any chance on passing the assault weapons ban or the limit on the size of magazines? >> i have to be optimistic. there's a thing about being attached to a weapon that automatically is firing and it has nothing to do with sportsmanship. i have been in combat. i have had automatic weapons. sometimes the weapon almost takes you over with the rapid fire that's involved here. it has nothing to do with killing animals, if that's what people want to do. it has nothing to do with sportsmanship. and being able to have these clips that are over ten rounds, you tell me, what fun is it going to be, because people have to change clips. we know why we're doing it. we know a number of people are killed in the process of having to change clips. and so i think that even though there may be an attachment to the automatic feeling of having a weapon, common sense will dicta
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)